Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Donald L. "Skip" Conover on August 29, 2008 at 8:38am

Of course the opportunities are uneven, but then again, all opportunities are uneven! I wanted to go to the Naval Academy, but couldn't because of my vision. It never occurred to me to go to Harvard, which would have improved my opportunities, but I did go to Hamilton College, where I was manager of the college beer hall (18 drinking age in those days), and still managed to earn my commission on the very same day as my classmates, who did attend the Canoe U. Who had more fun at college? Go figure! I think it somewhat depends on the opportunities you are talking about. Best regards, Skip

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim Durbin on August 29, 2008 at 9:34am

Let's see - women are on track to make up 60% of college graduates by 2012... I'd say its definitely time to start doing something about making sure women have the opportunity to get ahead!

In all seriousness,the problem is not one of gender, but of desire. The federal government has no role in orchestrating social change. They're messing with societal forces they don't understand (there's some fun research on what happens with populations reach 60/40 women/men, and the results aren't pretty), and they're doing so in a time when it's young men that are being failed by our schools.

If Barack wants change, he should raise his daughters to be entrepreneurs, solid and hard workers who refuse to allow government to coddle them. His example to them will do far more than government, and will have the benefit of doing no harm.

If there are structural impediments government has put in place to prevent women from achieving solely on the basis of their sex, they should be removed. Those have been. What he's attempting to do now, is change people through force (all government action is force). Perceived injustice because of unequal outcomes is not the same as injustice from direct action.

It was a throwaway line, and considering that Sarah Palin is the likely VP Pick, and Barack beat Hillary for the presidential nomination - what exactly is he complaining about?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Donald L. "Skip" Conover on August 29, 2008 at 9:53am

Just because Barack needed to say something to all of Hillary's women supporters does not mean that he disagrees with you. My guess is he would agree with most of your points. Best regards, Skip Conover

Jim Durbin said:

Let's see - women are on track to make up 60% of college graduates by 2012... I'd say its definitely time to start doing something about making sure women have the opportunity to get ahead!

In all seriousness,the problem is not one of gender, but of desire. The federal government has no role in orchestrating social change. They're messing with societal forces they don't understand (there's some fun research on what happens with populations reach 60/40 women/men, and the results aren't pretty), and they're doing so in a time when it's young men that are being failed by our schools.

If Barack wants change, he should raise his daughters to be entrepreneurs, solid and hard workers who refuse to allow government to coddle them. His example to them will do far more than government, and will have the benefit of doing no harm.

If there are structural impediments government has put in place to prevent women from achieving solely on the basis of their sex, they should be removed. Those have been. What he's attempting to do now, is change people through force (all government action is force). Perceived injustice because of unequal outcomes is not the same as injustice from direct action.

It was a throwaway line, and considering that Sarah Palin is the likely VP Pick, and Barack beat Hillary for the presidential nomination - what exactly is he complaining about?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Susan Burns on August 29, 2008 at 10:17am

Always an interesting topic! I think he was talking about the wage gaps and opportunities for advancement regardless of gender and/or ethnicity. While this is improving - and isn't as evident with emerging talent, it does still exist. There are many logical reasons for it - different types of jobs and women leaving the workplace to raise families to name a couple. However, there is enough evidence to indicate there is still a wage gap for the same job in many instances. And, equity in the C-suite as well. You may find the data from Catalyst interesting - while there isn't specifics for the "same job" it does indicate variances. The idea of a "boys club" was far reaching and left a lasting "ouch". It was not that long ago - late 70's, that female professors at Harvard were not allowed in the faculty dining hall. Just think what was happening in corporations!

Balance is very important. The decrease in the number of men going to college and "engaged" in the classroom is equally concerning. To a certain degree, as the pendulum was swinging to achieve equity in the classroom for girls it has disadvantaged boys. Check out this Newsweek article.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim Durbin on August 29, 2008 at 10:28am

I think a very instructive way to look at this is to compare the paid staffs of Barack Obama and John McCain.

Surely if Obama's campaign was serious about equal pay, we should see that reflected in the Senate staffs?

Obama Versus McCain Senate Staff

On average, women working in Obama’s Senate office were paid at least $6,000 below the average man working for the Illinois senator. That’s according to data calculated from the Report of the Secretary of the Senate, which covered the six-month period ending Sept. 30, 2007. Of the five people in Obama’s Senate office who were paid $100,000 or more on an annual basis, only one — Obama’s administrative manager — was a woman.

The average pay for the 33 men on Obama’s staff (who earned more than $23,000, the lowest annual salary paid for non-intern employees) was $59,207. The average pay for the 31 women on Obama’s staff who earned more than $23,000 per year was $48,729.91. (The average pay for all 36 male employees on Obama’s staff was $55,962; and the average pay for all 31 female employees was $48,729. The report indicated that Obama had only one paid intern during the period, who was a male.)

McCain, an Arizona senator, employed a total of 69 people during the reporting period ending in the fall of 2007, but 23 of them were interns. Of his non-intern employees, 30 were women and 16 were men. After excluding interns, the average pay for the 30 women on McCain’s staff was $59,104.51. The 16 non-intern males in McCain’s office, by comparison, were paid an average of $56,628.83.


I guess we know why this is such an issue. Obama looks around his offices and sees a problem, and rather than fix it, says the government should fix the problem. McCain simply fixes the problem.

And it's not just Obama. Check out Dee Dee Myers' complaints back in the Clinton days.

In one particularly wince-worthy story, she tells of stomping into chief of staff Leon Panetta's office upon learning that she made even less than a deputy in another office, a man with far less responsibility and lower rank than she. She demanded a $10,000 raise. Panetta flatly refused. His reasons: the guy took a pay cut to leave his previous job as a lawyer. "Plus, he has a family," Panetta said.

So what we have is a series of Democratic politicians demanding equal pay but not paying their female staff. Could it be that they don't really mean it? Or is this yet another example of projection?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Art Pitcher on August 29, 2008 at 10:57am

Maureen,

I do think so - actually moreso after reading what Amybeth had to say on the lack of men in the PR industry (I think that was Amybeth)..... She has a few astute observations on the subject.

-Art Pitcher
www.TheArtOfRecruiting.net

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Susan Burns on August 29, 2008 at 11:29am

PR has an issue with both men and ethnic minorities. One of the primary issues for PR is the low wages. If companies don't offer competitive salaries at entry-level then they can't build a balanced pipeline for career progression.

Art Pitcher said:

Maureen,

I do think so - actually moreso after reading what Amybeth had to say on the lack of men in the PR industry (I think that was Amybeth)..... She has a few astute observations on the subject.

-Art Pitcher
www.TheArtOfRecruiting.net

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Art Pitcher on August 29, 2008 at 12:07pm

Is that because women are willing to work for less?

-Art Pitcher
www.TheArtOfRecruiting.com


Susan Burns said:

PR has an issue with both men and ethnic minorities. One of the primary issues for PR is the low wages. If companies don't offer competitive salaries at entry-level then they can't build a balanced pipeline for career progression.

Art Pitcher said:

Maureen,

I do think so - actually moreso after reading what Amybeth had to say on the lack of men in the PR industry (I think that was Amybeth)..... She has a few astute observations on the subject.

-Art Pitcher
www.TheArtOfRecruiting.net

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Susan Burns on August 29, 2008 at 12:28pm

Good question Art. I've seen 3 trends - (1) reflective of men continuing to focus on being the primary family wage earner, to a larger degree than women; (2) prestige of the "school" within which the major sits at the university - arts/sciences rather than business so less men are attracted to the major; and, (3) perception of the "industry" as not "masculine" - obviously, self fulfilling prophecy.

There are many similarities between retail and PR. In fact, starting wages in retail are significantly higher than PR and development programs are move evolved. I was very surprised to find a mindset within PR that continued to believe that PR college interns should work for free "because its a privilege" and that graduating seniors were being offered internships. Both of these are also big turnoffs to men and ethnic minorities, as well as top-tier students in general. All of which shows up in the senior ranks over time.

What do you think?

Art Pitcher said:

Is that because women are willing to work for less?

-Art Pitcher
www.TheArtOfRecruiting.com


Susan Burns said:

PR has an issue with both men and ethnic minorities. One of the primary issues for PR is the low wages. If companies don't offer competitive salaries at entry-level then they can't build a balanced pipeline for career progression.

Art Pitcher said:

Maureen,

I do think so - actually moreso after reading what Amybeth had to say on the lack of men in the PR industry (I think that was Amybeth)..... She has a few astute observations on the subject.

-Art Pitcher
www.TheArtOfRecruiting.net

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Art Pitcher on August 29, 2008 at 3:14pm

Susan,

I think there is still a pervading mindset throughout this country and most of the world that women are simply worth less. I used to think it was just because they have been conditioned throughout time not to be assertive (for example, in asking for raises or negotiating).

However, I think the issue is actually much deeper. What I am going to say next is purely my opinion, but having a 12 year old daughter and getting to know her friends has allowed me to make a couple of observations.

I think society encourages young women to have a very temporary attitude about their careers because, after all, they're going to go get married and have babies. So why build your way up the career ladder if you're only going to abandon it when the right guy comes along?

This is not my viewpoint, but I am making an observation about the messages that are sent to young women, and that - I believe - is very telling about how much our society perceives the role of women.

In other words, as a hiring manager (general statement disclaimer, I mean a hiring manager OTHER than me), perhaps I am interviewing and in the back of my mind I'm seeing maternity leave, and maybe some time off after that, and maybe not coming back at all, after I've made an investment of both money and resources in this person. Whereas in my next interview, I'm wondering how much liquor this guy could hold before he passes out.

I'm just saying. We're better as a culture in that this gender bias appears to have become more COVERT rather than OVERT..... but we still have a long way to go before the GENERAL valuation of the work produced by women is perceived as equal. And then there is the whole PC movement and the feminization of male characteristics in an effort to appear empathetic, and the list goes on.

In some ways our society appears to have done a fairly good job trying to create an equilibrium, but then I see soccer teams that are "participation" based, where there are no winners and losers - or where EVERYONE'S a winner.

That's not preparing our children effectively for the workplace, in my opinion.

Sorry about the tangent.

Art Pitcher
www.TheArtOfRecruiting.net


Susan Burns said:

Good question Art. I've seen 3 trends - (1) reflective of men continuing to focus on being the primary family wage earner, to a larger degree than women; (2) prestige of the "school" within which the major sits at the university - arts/sciences rather than business so less men are attracted to the major; and, (3) perception of the "industry" as not "masculine" - obviously, self fulfilling prophecy.

There are many similarities between retail and PR. In fact, starting wages in retail are significantly higher than PR and development programs are move evolved. I was very surprised to find a mindset within PR that continued to believe that PR college interns should work for free "because its a privilege" and that graduating seniors were being offered internships. Both of these are also big turnoffs to men and ethnic minorities, as well as top-tier students in general. All of which shows up in the senior ranks over time.

What do you think?

Art Pitcher said:

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Susan Burns on August 29, 2008 at 3:36pm

Art - all very good points and to some extent the media has not helped shape a different perspective for women. Here's an interesting global perspective which speaks to the importance of gender equality as it relates to sustainability - taken from the UNs Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Also interesting is similar information on sustainability from EarthTrends.

" Making the Case for Women

In defense of a gender perspective: Goals 1-7
Gender equality is not only a goal in its own right, but an essential ingredient for achieving all the MDGs, be it poverty eradication, protecting the environment, or access to healthcare. Attempting to meet the MDGs without incorporating gender equality will both increase the costs and minimize success. Because the MDGs are mutually reinforcing, success in meeting the goals will have positive impacts on gender equality, just as progress toward gender equality in any one area will help to further each of the other goals.

Goal 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger.
It is now generally recognized that the majority of the world’s poor are women. Goal 1 reflects this by broadening the definition of poverty to encompass not only income poverty but other dimensions such as lack of empowerment, opportunity, capacity and security. Because many aspects of gender inequality influence the different dimensions of poverty, promoting gender equality in the design of strategies and actions to meet this goal is critical. Gender equality has a direct impact on economic growth and the reduction of income poverty by raising productivity improving efficiency, increasing economic opportunities and empowering women.

Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education.
Of the 150 million children aged 6-11 who don’t attend school, over 90 million are girls. Meeting the education goal therefore requires that the distinctive conditions preventing girls or boys from attending or completing primary school be addressed. Reducing education costs, improving quality, tackling parental concerns about female modesty or safety and increasing the returns to families that invest in female schooling are factors that can overcome social and economic barriers to girls’ education. Goal 2 is key to achieving Goal 1; eliminating gender disparities in education is one of the most effective poverty reduction strategies.

Goal 3: Promote gender equality and women’s empowerment.
Of the world's 876 million illiterate people over 15 years two-thirds are women; working women have less social protection and employment rights; a third of all women has been violently abused; over 500,000 women die each year in pregnancy and childbirth; and rates of HIV/AIDS infection among women are rapidly increasing. The proportion of seats held by women in national parliaments is also included making this goal important in its own right and to all the other MDG goals.

Art Pitcher said:

Susan,

I think there is still a pervading mindset throughout this country and most of the world that women are simply worth less. I used to think it was just because they have been conditioned throughout time not to be assertive (for example, in asking for raises or negotiating).

However, I think the issue is actually much deeper. What I am going to say next is purely my opinion, but having a 12 year old daughter and getting to know her friends has allowed me to make a couple of observations.

I think society encourages young women to have a very temporary attitude about their careers because, after all, they're going to go get married and have babies. So why build your way up the career ladder if you're only going to abandon it when the right guy comes along?

This is not my viewpoint, but I am making an observation about the messages that are sent to young women, and that - I believe - is very telling about how much our society perceives the role of women.

In other words, as a hiring manager (general statement disclaimer, I mean a hiring manager OTHER than me), perhaps I am interviewing and in the back of my mind I'm seeing maternity leave, and maybe some time off after that, and maybe not coming back at all, after I've made an investment of both money and resources in this person. Whereas in my next interview, I'm wondering how much liquor this guy could hold before he passes out.

I'm just saying. We're better as a culture in that this gender bias appears to have become more COVERT rather than OVERT..... but we still have a long way to go before the GENERAL valuation of the work produced by women is perceived as equal. And then there is the whole PC movement and the feminization of male characteristics in an effort to appear empathetic, and the list goes on.

In some ways our society appears to have done a fairly good job trying to create an equilibrium, but then I see soccer teams that are "participation" based, where there are no winners and losers - or where EVERYONE'S a winner.

That's not preparing our children effectively for the workplace, in my opinion.

Sorry about the tangent.

Art Pitcher
www.TheArtOfRecruiting.net


Susan Burns said:

Good question Art. I've seen 3 trends - (1) reflective of men continuing to focus on being the primary family wage earner, to a larger degree than women; (2) prestige of the "school" within which the major sits at the university - arts/sciences rather than business so less men are attracted to the major; and, (3) perception of the "industry" as not "masculine" - obviously, self fulfilling prophecy.

There are many similarities between retail and PR. In fact, starting wages in retail are significantly higher than PR and development programs are move evolved. I was very surprised to find a mindset within PR that continued to believe that PR college interns should work for free "because its a privilege" and that graduating seniors were being offered internships. Both of these are also big turnoffs to men and ethnic minorities, as well as top-tier students in general. All of which shows up in the senior ranks over time.

What do you think?

Art Pitcher said:

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion